Not bankable anymore ?
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Kirsten Dunst
gaspardoup — 9 years ago(August 18, 2016 03:29 AM)
I think that she has become an incredible actrice but for some years now, it seems like she won't be a lead in any big studio movie anymore. I know that the big studios are mostly doing sequels and Superhero movies but there's still some really good directors working for them. Spielberg, Burton, Tarantino, Del Toro, David O. Russell, Denis Villeneuve, She's perfect in everything she does but it seems like she can't get any lead role in these big studio movies. She did Midnight Special for Warner but it was released as an indie movie in very few theaters and now she's in Hidden Figures for the Fox but she seems to have a really small role.
-
aceshop3 — 9 years ago(August 23, 2016 10:31 PM)
No, she's just discerning with her roles. I think there is some element of the big directors like Villeneuve, Cuaron, Jarmusch, O' Russell etc. not putting her in their movies because she's been pigeonholed but if anything, Fargo, Melancholia and Midnight Special have done wonders to change that. I wouldn't be too surprised if she turned up in one of their movies soon.
Also, that small role in Hidden Figures probably was a great strategic moveit's an awards-baitey movie with a great cast and it may turn out to be a pivotal, if small, rolekind of like her role in Midnight Special. And don't forget, she's got Woodshock and The Beguiled coming upboth seem like classic Oscar-bait to me. -
gaspardoup — 9 years ago(August 24, 2016 01:44 PM)
For me she was excellent in "Midnight Special". Her facial expressions on this beautiful music in the final scene it was so moving. I know that these roles are good for her career but I was hoping that after Melancholia and Fargo she'll be cast in the kind of roles Amy Adams, Emily Blunt, Carey Mulligan and Alicia Vikander are cast for. It's like in "The two faces of January". It's a nice movie were she's perfect. But come on, she's needs more juicy roles than that ! She can do so much better ! For Woodshock, I didn't find any information about this movie so I really don't know if it will be an obscure little movie or a big indie hit. For the Sofia Coppola movie, it's really exciting but she wasn't nominated for "Virgin Suicides" and "Marie Antoinette" and she had the lead role in both. Here, she's with Kidman and Fanning so I don't know.
I hope all the good directors are going to wake up and think of her more often. -
TMC-4 — 9 years ago(November 28, 2016 10:06 PM)
Theres no doubt in my mind that Kirstens personal problems (whether it be alcohol-related as often rumored or depression as her official claim) curtailed her post-
Spider-Man
(the mostly critically indifference towards the third movie and the subsequent reboot certainly didnt help matters) momentum. That sort of thing could make it hard on an actor/actress in terms of how one could be marketed. Kirsten herself even admitted that she likes to smoke pot:
http://www.starpulse.com/news/index.php/2007/04/09/kirsten_dunst_admits_she_likes_smoking_m
What didnt help matters is that you can argue that because of stuff like the
Spider-Man
movies and
Bring it On
, Kirsten had a bit of a mostly young fan-base. Maybe part of Kirstens problem is that she made her niche as a child-teen-young adult actress, before eventually aging out. And because Kirsten ever really proved herself as seriously bankable leading lady w/o
Spider-Man
(as perhaps evidence by stuff like
Elizabethtown
and
Wimbledon
) all that was really left for her to do was smaller, more offbeat and edgier work.
Then again,
Bring it On
could serve as an prime example of Kirsten being able to carrying a hit movie on her own but I guess thats right there w/ her
Spider-Man
successor, Emma Stone in
Easy A
. Both movies were more or less, bridges or stepping stones (they werent officially box office stars yet) to a full fledged adult career (and both movies incidentally, came shortly before landing
Spider-Man
).
Also then again, maybe the experience in making the
Spider-Man
movies by the end sort of soured or burned her out on making those type of huge, mainstream, blockbuster movies (Im quite sure that Kirsten made enough money off of those movies that she could retire) in the foreseeable future. Unfortunately, the movies that Kirsten has done since
Spider-Man 3
has from my understanding, not grossed more than $3 million at the box office. So this of course (along w/ her I think 2 year absence from movies to deal w/ personal issues) that she disappeared from the mainstream.
What annoys me about Kirsten based on some of the more recent interviews that I posted on here is that it seems like shes awfully bewildered when regular people ask her about not seeing her in high profile movies since
Spider-Man 3
. I dont know, I guess it somewhat strikes me as Kirsten sounding a bit snobby on her part. Its like she cant totally fathom the idea that most people would rather see her in more commercial/mainstream stuff (besides Spider-Man of course) like
Bring it On
,
Get Over It
,
Jumanji
, etc. Kirstens point of view seems to be that the movies that she pretty much exclusively makes now are those in which she actually gets to act, and thus are the only ones worthy of our time (regardless of visibility).